Featured Authors

Deborah Haarsma serves as the President of BioLogos, a position she has held since January 2013. Previously, she served as professor and chair in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

N.T. Wright is a leading biblical scholar, former Bishop of Durham in the Church of England, and current Research Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity at St. Mary's College in the University of St. Andrews.

Get Involved

With Gentleness and Reverence: My Journey Out of Young-Earth Creationism

When she said, “Carbon dating is a crock!” I had to walk away before I said something mean. I was a high school senior, an AP Biology student, and somewhere between agnostic and antagonistic towards God. She was the Christian girl in the freshman art class with me. In math class, we talked about math, but in art class there was time and space to talk about anything—so we discussed the origin of the universe. I just couldn’t understand how anyone could believe in the Bible when science had already explained how the world had come to be.

Months later, as a new biology major at a public university, the Holy Spirit took over my life. It involved a longhaired pastor in full robes handing me a Bible at 10:00 PM on a Saturday night—a sidewalk conversion—and a new commitment to live a life that honors God. I decided that since I was now a Christian I had to believe the Bible and I guess that meant I had I better read it.

The Bible seemed to say clearly that God had made the world—and all life forms—quite recently. As a biology student, I had to learn how to engage science that seemed to say otherwise. My education came from the work of Kent "Dr. Dino" Hovind, a young-earth creationist (YEC) apologist. I consumed as much young-earth creationism as I could. My senior project in the biology department was titled, “A Scientific Challenge to the Dogma of Evolution.” I obliterated every question and shook the worldview of a room full of college seniors—or so I thought at the time. I was “ready to make your defense to anyone who demands from you an accounting for the hope that is in you” (1 Peter 3:15). After graduation, while working for a pharmaceutical company, I met another believer. My first question for her was, “How old is the Earth?” She claimed to follow Jesus, but I needed to know if she was really a Christian.

As I set off for graduate school to pursue a Ph.D. in biochemistry, I prayed that God would send people into my life who could help me know Him more. Shortly after arriving, I met two people who wanted to meet weekly to discuss God, life, and interesting books. One was a Presbyterian youth pastor and the other was completing a Ph.D. in ancient Hebrew. These friends gently prodded at my YEC beliefs. They reminded me of the rest of the sentence from 1 Peter 3:15, “yet do it with gentleness and reverence.” We read books together like John Sailhamer Genesis Unbound and John Walton’s Lost World of Genesis One. While I was ready to fight any scientific challenge to the word of God, I was completely unprepared to learn that what I was arguing for may not actually be claimed by Scripture. If the Bible does not demand a young Earth, or recent creation of life, then why was I fighting so hard against everything I had learned in all those science courses?

It has been the work of biblical scholars and theologians all along that has guided my development in science and faith. First, through N.T. Wright, and then later through a better understanding of Reformed Theology, I came to see the story of Scripture as a whole. The Bible is not about what my God has done for me so that I can go to Him in heaven. The Bible is about God, and what God is doing in the world. Scripture teaches that this world is God’s good world, made and sustained by the creator God, but that this world is a twisted and fallen version of what it should be. However, in Christ Jesus, all things are being made new and all of creation yearns for consummation in the Kingdom of God.

This larger view of Scripture helps to shape how I can function as a Christian and a biology professor. When I study biology, do I see evidence of God’s good creating work? Of course! A cell lives because of an uncountable number of molecular interactions that are all temporary, blind, and unguided. Our bodies function because billions of these cells communicate, share, and cooperate without our direction or knowledge. Praise be to God!

At the same time, when I study science, does it seem like the world is less than it should be? Of course. The Human Immunodeficiency Virus is so busting with life that with just nine genes it is able to copy itself billions of times per day. But all of that potential for reproduction is twisted toward death, corrupting our most intimate relationships (mother-child, sexual partners) and using them for death and suffering instead of life and life flourishing.

Yet by the grace of God, death does not have the last word. All things are being made new. When researchers studied the structure of HIV protease leading to the development of the protease inhibitor that changed HIV from a death threat to a chronic condition, they were doing the redemptive work of Christ. Through scientific and medical miracles God is bringing life where death aims to reign. It is the responsibility of all Christ followers to do the work of God wherever He has placed us. That is true whether that is by making new HIV drugs, studying cell communication, or teaching biology majors at a small college.

I have spent my entire adult life studying biology and biochemistry, but it was my lack of theological understanding that clouded my ability to recognize the work of God in science. When I felt like I had to fight against scientists who were disrespecting the name of God, I saw scientific knowledge as ammunition in an intellectual war. Now, with gentleness and reverence, I am able to see every scientific revelation as a “beautiful book in which all creatures, great and small, are as letters to make us ponder the invisible things of God” (Belgic Confession).

Notes

Citations

Carlson, C. (2017, August 22). With Gentleness and Reverence: My Journey Out of Young-Earth CreationismRetrieved March 19, 2018, from /blogs/guest/with-gentleness-and-reverence-my-journey-out-of-young-earth-creationism

About the Author

Clay Carlson is an associate professor of Biology at Trinity Christian College in Palos Heights, IL. He sees God’s beauty in the stars, microscopic worms, college students, and his family. He enjoys making music, hiking with kids, road trips, and making jam.

"What kind of evidence would somebody need to have in order to be rationally compelled to say that an event was a miracle? That person would have to know that this event could not possibly be explained by future science. But not only is such a belief unwarranted, it’s also bad for future science to believe it."

These provocative words are written by Princeton philosopher Hans Halvorson (a Christian), in an article that itself provoked some good discussion when we posted it last week.

Check out the full article (link in comments), and then respond to the quote above. Does calling something a "miracle" put it in danger of being debunked by future scientific advances? Is there a different way of thinking about the concept of a miracle, that might satisfy his concerns? Feel free to discuss below. ... See moreSee less

Hard for me to see that the Incarnation is not a miracle. For others , God could be working on a quantum level?? But does the latter fall into”God of the Gaps?”

5 hours ago · 1

Amen🌀 Jesus doesn't care about Alabama Crimson Tide 🏈 football. Instead, He loves 🌀 Spring and the start of ⚾ baseball season. That's why He started His own story, "In the Big inning..." Just watch 🌀 His wind-up! You need to start reading your 📖 Bible!

3 hours ago

One thing for sure, it is more a philosophical question than a religious one.

7 hours ago · 2

Great article. In answer to you question about a different way of thinking about miracles that would "satisfy his concern", to me it would make sense to explain a miracle in terms of something that everyone (religious and non-religious alike) would have no explanation for, given our current understanding of science.

Science will never describe the full expanse of reality. Science is not geared to that end. This is basic knowledge.
Reason is the handmaiden of faith because faith takes us where reason cannot go. As such, the only thing that will ever describe the fill expanse of reality is faith supernaturally given by God, i.e. God graciously enlightening the intellect. Reason gives way to faith because reason is limited in its capacity to describe reality.
This is not to say reason is not essential. It is the handmaiden of faith because it is a true and good servant to faith. As such faith and reason never contradict, but faith does transcend reason.

10 hours ago · 5

I'm tired of these types of questions constantly being proposed. It was not a scientist who discovered that dead human beings do not rise from the dead (which is different than Jesus resurrection) it was simple human experience. Therefore, the question is rather silly to ask. My first reply is to ask: who cares if Jesus resurrection contradicts science? My second reply is to make the observation that this question is phrased in such a way that science is presupposed as the final arbiter of truth claims like the resurrection of Jesus. Thirdly, how exactly could scientists study the resurrection of Jesus? Scripture tells us that God raised Jesus from the dead. Can science study this claim? Fourth, it would be one thing to subject the resurrection to some sort of scientific investigation ( I know not what or how) and a completely different thing to study what the resurrection of Jesus means for me or you personally. It seems Biologos is in need of some good theologians and philosophers to add to this conversation. Finally, this question smacks of a form of Evidentialism that would make faith subject to the vagarities of evidence. In the end I have to affirm that it matters little to me if the resurrection of Jesus did contradict science. On another note, one could ask: whose "science" and which scientists?

3 hours ago · 1

Exactly so.

11 hours ago · 1

Mmmmmm, I would say that a resurrection is contradictory to observed evidence, but that's fine. A God that is truly supernatural would act supernaturally at times. Although, I suppose God could whip up a truly natural Star Trek hypospray to overcome the decay process and relaunch the body's systems.